Scholars widely accept that the well-documented benefits of biophilia–the human being's strong urge to connect with nature–are genuine to improved health. Then why, with the global acceptance and scientific validity of wellness design concepts, do architects not use this beneficial concept regularly–especially when designing isolated workspaces? This qualitative research explores architecture's current design decision process to better understand this design phenomenon, and to identify where architectural biophilic knowledge domains may be deficient. This study explores questions such as: Does the architect's lack of biophilic knowledge and/or structured wellness design decision support framework affect the decision? Would the existence of a wellness design tool better support the design decision? An explanatory case study using a purposeful study sample of architects, biophilia design experts, and associated specialists is used to develop design decision support frameworks. Level 1 establishes a propositional theory derived from the literature and professional experience, level 2 from architect interviews and observational meetings, and level 3 from a Delphi workgroup session. Framework evolutions help identify design-phase-specific knowledge gaps. This study finds that a deficiency in early exposure to a priori, explicit and tacit biophilic knowledge is creating a critical gap, thus diminishing a posteriori biophilic knowledge and research in the architecture profession. This study asserts that early exposure to biophilic theories and principles can enhance the profession and provide a knowledge bridge using an informed biophilia design support framework with a proposed biophilia project management tool. / Doctor of Philosophy / Few will dispute that the well-documented benefits of biophilia–the human being's strong urge to connect with nature–are genuine to improved health. Then why, with the global acceptance and scientific validity of wellness design concepts, do architects not use this beneficial concept regularly–especially when designing windowless workspaces? A qualitative explanatory case study using a purposeful study sample of architects, biophilia design experts, and associated specialists was used to develop a design decision support framework that evolved from level 1-3. Framework progressions helped identify specific knowledge gaps in each design phase. This study found that a deficiency in early exposure to a priori, explicit and tacit biophilic knowledge is creating a critical gap, thus diminishing a posteriori biophilic knowledge and research in the architecture profession. This study asserts that early exposure to biophilic theories and principles can enhance the profession and provide a knowledge bridge using an informed biophilia design decision support framework with a proposed biophilia project management tool.

Ett problem då en akademisk uppsats skall vetenskapligt utvärderas är att examinatorn måste kunna, på ett så objektivt sätt som möjligt, utreda om uppsatsen uppfyller krav på vetenskaplig sannolikhet. Allt för att arbetet skall tillåtas nå den praktiska tillämpningen hos allmänheten. Med vetenskaplig sannolikhet menas alltså den grad som en teori kan användas i verkligheten med lyckat resultat. Detta kräver mer utveckling och anpassning av verktyg att fylla ett gap i den akademiska världens förbättringsarbete. Att släppa en uppsats som ligger långt från sanningen kan vara både farligt och ekonomiskt förödande. Därmed är syftet och målsättningen med denna uppsats att utvärdera hjälpmedel som ger forskare (deltagare) i den akademiska världen (miljö) möjlighet att bedöma (fenomen) eget och andras akademiska vetenskapliga arbeten. Hjälpmedlen (undersökningsobjekten) som används i denna fallstudie är dels en matris och som byggts för ändamålet, dels en klassisk mognadsmodell. För att uppnå syftet genomförs en kvalitativ undersökning med observationsschema och innehållsanalys på verktygen som jämförs i en analys, då denna metod fungerar med vald design (fallstudie, tvärsnittsdesign och komparativ jämförelse). Resultatet av studien visar att förbättringsverktyg kan användas till att utvärdera uppsatser processinriktat med tillägg av etiska ställningstagande. Uppsatsgranskaren påverkar i detta analysen av uppsatsen genom val av strategi, där varje valmöjlighet utgår från samma vision. Det är i detta centralt att välja rätt strategi så att uppsatsförfattarna påverkas positivt. Centralt är också antalet subjektiva beslut, vilket påverkar objektivitetsgraden. Styrkan i slutsatsen är att den behandlar flera dimensioner av uppsatsgranskningen. Dock kan slutresultatet påverkats av det engagemang uppsatsförfattaren, till denna uppsats, känner för innovationen av det nya matrisverktyget. Detta är ett etiskt dilemma. / This thesis raises a problem when an academic paper is to be scientifically evaluated. The examiner must be able to see, in the most objective way possible, whether the thesis meets the requirements of scientific probability, for the work to be allowed to reach the practical application of the public. This requires more development and adaptation of tools to fill a gap in the academic world's improvement work. Releasing an essay that is far from the truth can be both dangerous and financially devastating. Thus, the purpose and goal of this thesis is to evaluate aids that give researchers (participants) in academia (environment) the opportunity to assess (phenomena) own and others' academic scientific work. The means (study objects) used in this case study are partly a matrix and built for the purpose, and partly a classic maturation model. To achieve this purpose, a qualitative survey with observation scheme and content analysis is carried out on the tools, as this method works with the selected design (case study, cross-sectional design, and comparative comparison). The results of the study show that improvement tools can be used to evaluate essays process-oriented with the addition of ethical stances. In this essay, the essay reviewer influences the analysis of the thesis by choosing a strategy, where each choice is based on the same vision. It is central to choose the right strategy so that the essay authors are positively affected. Also central is the number of subjective decisions, which affects the degree of objectivity. The strength of the conclusion is that it deals with several dimensions of the essay review. However, the result may be influenced by the commitment the essay author of this paper feels to the innovation of the new matrix tool, which is an ethical dilemma. / <p>2022-06-05</p>